Knightriders

OK, besides Ed Harris and Tom Savini, who else is in this amazing biker film from the early 80s? Well, it doesn't really matter because sometimes things just come together in a way that transcends what the likely original intent was, to patch together a biker movie about jousting knights who engage in feudal combat from motorcycles instead of horses. Yep. The costumes are a bit cheesy, the acting is a bit raw and amateurish and the story..., ah, the story: The story is the Arthurian tragedy of innocence, self sacrifice, honor and unfaithfulness. The tale works around the triad of the King, the very young Ed Harris, the villain, the wonderful Tom Savini and the knight protector, Lancelot, Gary Lahti. Each of these figures represents an archetype which very likely unbeknown to the film makers and they come through wonderfully in the way in which this tale is patched together. Billy,as the King Arthur prototype is idealistic, uncompromising loyal to his own mythology and like the legendary Arthur, ego-less. His loyal knight retainer, Alan, is Lancelot in his nobility and loyalty to his sovereign while coveting his wife all the time. Savini is purely delightful as the Modred counterpart, even taking Morgan le Fay's name as a pun. Morgan covets the crown and tries to usurp it by going off only to discover his new realm is a forest of paper tigers. The final scene and resolution of the tragedy works wonderfully, giving a the only glimpse of the famous story-teller and raconteur, Brother Blue as the wizard, Merlin.

As an anthropologist and mythologist, I saw this tale back in the early 80s and was impressed how the underlying mythology of an essentially low budget film held together in such a wonderful way in spite of a few flaws. I consider it a cult classic.

The same person who turned me on to "Black Christmas" loaned me this little gem of a movie. It's highly original, well acted and written, and has some surprisingly good stuntwork. The story is great and there are some poignant scenes toward the end that just make you cheer. The ending is downbeat and uplifting at the same time. If you're looking for something enjoyably different in a movie, check this out.

The Arthurian legend comes to life. What we all hoped for in a utopian society devoid of comericialisation is here, shining through the darkest horizon of today's popular youth culture. The sheer romance and spirit of this film is remarkable, much like Romero's other works but in other ways completely different, the film brings hope to the disenchanted rather than adopting the usual cynical "we can't change anything so lets conform" attitude of today's society. King William (Ed Harris) is the founder and leader of a group of travelling knights, swapping the horses for motorcycles and allowing the public to get a glimpse on their way of life through jousting tournaments. Marred by the public's dependence on sex and violence the group find themselves crushed by commercial pressure. The audiences want to see blood, and the tragedy of it all lies in their ignorance to Billy's intense dream. it all starts to fall apart when they receive interest from big promoters and their potential as a sellable source of entertainment is recognised.

Romero truly shines through here and the only criticism I can possibly think of this near perfect film lies in the era it was filmed and set it. Had this film been made in the 70's it would have looked a lot better, or even in the 90's, however the 80's was awful for films in general and it comes as no surprise that this film was practically shelved. On the plus side it also proves that the 80's didn't just produce Friday the 13th movies, and that someone had an idea good enough to really make a film like this work.

Tom Savini, Gary Lahti, Amy Ingersoll, Chris Romero and in particular Brother Blue all give startling performances. The love and care that went into this film is outstanding.

However, I must stress ten-fold that if you want to see blood and guts, and don't really care for the dozens of underlying plot lines that revolve in this film to just watch something else. You have to be prepared to try to understand what Romero is trying to show us, and what the film meant in the relevant decade (and still mean today).

This is a truly amazing film that will make you laugh, cry and cheer. Its not only worth watching but is a keeper for sure.

In between all of the horror from "Dawn Of The Dead" (1978) and "Creepshow" (1982), George Romero directed the ambitious and unusual "Knightriders" (1981). This greatly overlooked film is quite clearly one of Romero's more personal and mature film efforts to date.

A very youthful Ed Harris plays Billy, a self-styled King Arthur-type, who's the "crowned" leader of the Knightriders. This travelling troupe of performers stage jousts (in full armor) while on motorcycles for the entertainment of all the thrill-seeking spectators at county fairs.

As the story goes - Billy tries to persuade his followers to live under an old-fashioned code of honor, but the constant pressure of balancing ideals against realities, and the financial problems of running The Knightriders as a business, inevitably leads to conflicts and trouble.

Yes. "Knightriders" is a bit silly at times. But, all-in-all, it is pretty good entertainment, even though it is a tad long with a running time of 145 minutes.

I think that Romero did a fine job with the "Knightrider's" story, which reflects the choice that many artists make between "pure" expression of their vision (whatever that might be) and a compromise to achieve commercial success.

From what I gather, "Knightriders" didn't do very well at the box office when it was released. Upon watching it, it's easy to come up with plausible explanations for this. While the poster seemed to promise wall-to-wall action, there isn't that much of it, and what action there is often becomes monotonous. The movie tries to do so much that many of the plot threads feel unfinished at the end. And of course, the unbelievably long running time - 145 MINUTES!!!

Yet at the same time, I can't really call this a BAD movie - I would lean more to calling it "misguided". That's because as problem-filled the movie is, there are some good things about it. The actors give their characters a lot of heart - Brother Blue is especially good. (And I thought Savini actually wasn't bad in his role as well.) While the action scenes become monotonous, there are some impressive stunt sequences. The medieval-style music score fits like a glove. And there are some moments that are just *perfect*, the best being the opening sequence.

If you do watch it, I recommend that you split up your viewing into several sessions, so that you don't become too bored by how the movie keeps, well, spinning its wheels. There's a great movie hiding in there - perhaps with a lot of work (and a little magic), it might one day be successfully remade.